Works, Book 2 · Section 4
SECTION IV.
AND thus have I done with the First part of my Text, which for distinction sake I called The Admonition: I come now to the Second, which I termed A Caution; Be more ready to obey, than to offer the Sacrifice of fools: as much as to say, Prefer not the Secondary service of God before the First and Principal. Our Translation hath, Be more ready to hear, than, &c. whereby some have taken occasion childishly to apply this Scripture against that custom of a short and private Prayer at our first coming into the Church, before we joyn with the Congregation. For we should (say they) rather hear and listen to what the Minister is reading or speaking, (as Solomon here bids us;) than at such a time to betake our selves to any private devotion; which (say they) is but the Sacrifice of fools. But I would themselves who thus argue were as wise as they should be: For if they were, they would consider both that Solomon (according to the time wherein he spake) must needs mean of another kind of Sacrifice than what so loose a notion importeth, namely of such as were then used in the Temple he had built; and besides, that this sense of theirs directly thwarts the purport and meaning of the words going before, which is, that we ought to use some sign of reverence when we come into the house of God, such as according to the custom of the West is this. But though none of these things were, yet would this Text be nothing to their purpose: Forasmuch as by Hearing in this place is not meant auricular hearing, but practical, that is, Obedience to God's commandments, according as the Vulgar hath,*Obedience is better than the Sacrifices of fools. 1 Sam. 15. 22. Melior est obedientia quàm victimae stultorum. For it is the same with that Proverbial sentence of Scripture, Obedience is better than Sacrifice, which Samuel used in that bitter reproof of King Saul, for sparing Agag and the best of the spoil of the Amalekites, upon a pretence of sacrificing to the Lord in Gilgal. Hath the Lord (saith he) as great delight in burnt-offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice; and to hearken, than the fat of rams. The word here twice rendered obey, is foreign. the same which is in my Text, and it is an ordinary signification thereof in Scripture. The case is clear.
But was not the offering of Sacrifice, will some man say, part of the obedience due unto the divine Law? How come they then to be thus opposed one to the other? Give me leave therefore, before I give my full explication of this passage, to enquire and consider of some others, of much more difficulty in this respect, yet their meaning conducing to the understanding of this.
There are divers places in Scripture disparaging and villifying Sacrifices, yea so far, as if Sacrifice were a service which God neither appointed nor approved. As Psal. 51. 16, 17. Thou desirest not Sacrifice, (saith David,) else would I have given it thee; but thou delightest not in burnt-offerings. The sacrifice of God is a troubled spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God thou wilt not despise. Hosea 6. 6. I will have mercy, and not sacrifice. Micah 6. 6. Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow my self before the most High? shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old? 7. Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, and with ten thousands of rivers of oyl? Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? 8. He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Nay, Ier. 7. 21, 22, 23. he seems to say expresly, that he never commanded them: Put (saith he) your burnt-offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh. For I spake not unto your Fathers nor commanded them, in the day that I brought them out of the Land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings and sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people; and walk ye in the wayes that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you.
Yet nothing is more plain than that God ordained Sacrifices at Mount Sinai. How then shall this difficulty be resolved? Some, and those of the Ancients too, have affirmed, that these Ordinances of Sacrifice were not given to Israel at first, nor prima intentione Dei; but were (as they call them) foreign, superinducta, afterwards imposed upon them, when they had committed Idolatry in making and worshipping the golden Calf. But the contrary to this is also apparent. For to pass by Cain and Abel's sacrifices and the sacrifices of Noah and Abraham; when the Lord pronounced the Decalogue from Mount Sinai, he added this, as it were an Appendix thereto, Ye shall not make with me gods of silver,Exod. 20. 23, 24. neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold: Only an Altar thou shalt make unto me, and shalt Sacrifice thereon thy burnt-offerings, and thy peace-offerings, thy sheep and thine Oxen, &c. and this before Moses came down from the Mount, or the Calf was yet made. Nay, more than all this, when Moses and Aaron were sent unto Pharaeoh, the effect of their Embassy was, The God of the Hebrews saith, Let my people go, Exod. 3. 18. & 5. 1. 3. 8.that they may sacrifice unto me, three dayes journey in the wilderness. And when Pharaoh would have given them leave to have sacrificed to their God in the Land;Exod. 8. 27. No, (saith Moses) we will go three days journey into the wilderness, and there Sacrifice to the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us. What shall we answer then to those passages of Scripture where God disclaimeth Sacrifice, saying, he required no such Service at his peoples hands; yea, that he commanded them no such thing when he brought them out of the Land of Egypt?
For the assoiling this difficulty, according to the differing quality of the passages which are or may be produced to this purpose, I lay down these three Propositions.
1. That according to the propriety and genius of the Hebrew tongue, a Comparative sense is often expressed after the form of an Antithesis: As in that of Ioel,Ioel 2. 13. Rent your hearts, and not your garments; that is, more or rather than your garments: Prov. 8. 10. Receive my instruction, and not silver; that is, rather than silver, (as the words following teach us to construe it) and knowledge rather than choice gold. Likewise in the New Testament, Lay not up treasures for your selves on earth, but lay up for your selves treasures in heaven; Matt. 19. 20.that is, Treasures in Heaven rather than treasures on earth; have more …are to lay up the one than the other. According to this construction only, without more ado, some of the aforesaid passages will be discharged of their difficulty: as namely that of Hosea, I desired mercy, and not sacrifice, that is, more or rather than sacrifice; as the following words give us to understand, which are, and the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings; and according as the same sense is elsewhere expressed, as Prov. 21. 3. To do justice and judgment, is more acceptable to the Lord than Sacrifice. But all will not be thus salved.
2. Wherefore I lay down this second Proposition; That antecedenter, antecedently, it is true, that God commanded not Sacrifice should be offered unto him, neither when the Law was given, nor before; but consequenter, consequently only. For the understanding whereof we must know, That Sacrifice was a Rite whereby men renewed a Covenant with God, by making a…onement for their sin; therefore it presupposed a breach and transgression of the Law. But the will of God was not, that men should transgress his Law, and violate the Covenant he had made with them, but that they should observe and keep it; which if they did, Sacrifice would have no place. This is that I mean, when I say that God required not nor commanded Sacrifice antecedently, but that men should keep his Commandments. But in case sin were committed, and the articles of his Covenant violated, then and in such a state God ordained and admitted of Sacrifice for a Rite of atonement and redintegration of his Covenant with men: that is, he commanded Sacrifice only consequenter, consequently, as a remedy, if sin were committed. And if those Ancients could be thus understood who say that Sacrifice was not ordained when the Law was first given, but after it was transgressed; namely, if their meaning were only, that the ordinance of Sacrifice presupposed a transgression of the Law; then their Assertion were true: but otherwise historically taken, it cannot be defended. Now according to this proposition is of that of Ieremy 7. 22, 23. to be understood, (or if there be any other like it) I spake not unto your Fathers, nor commanded them, in the day that I brought them out of the Land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings and Sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them; Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the wayes that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you.
3. My third Proposition is this; That when Sacrifice was to be offered in case of sin, yet even then God accepted not thereof primariò, primarily and for it self, as though any refreshment or emolument accrued to him thereby, (as the Gentiles fondly supposed of their gods;) but secondarily only, as a testimony of the conscience of the offerer, desiring with humble repentance to glorifie him with a Present, and by that Rite to renew a covenant with him. For Sacrifice (as I have said) was oblatio foed…ralis a federal oblation. Now Almighty God renews a Covenant with, or receiveth again into his favour, none but the repentant sinner; and therefore accepts of Sacrifice in no other regard, but as a token and effect of this. Otherwise it is an abomination unto him, as whereby men professed a desire of being reconciled unto God, when they had offended him, and yet had no such meaning. Hence God rejects all Sacrifices wherein there is no Contrition, nor Purpose to forsake sin and keep his commandments, which are the parts of Repentance. So is to be taken that in the first of Esay: Ver. 11-18.To what purpose is the multitude of your Sacrifices?—Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me.—Wash ye, make you clean, put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes, cease to do evil:—then (if you offer sacrifice unto me) though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow, &c. and that in Esay the last: To this man will I look, to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit. He that killeth an ox, (namely otherwise,) is as if he slew a man; Ver. 2, 3.he that Sacrificeth a lamb, (unless he comes with this disposition) as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered bloud; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an Idol. And surely, he that blesseth an Idol is so far from renewing a Covenant with the Lord his God, that he breaks it: So did they who without conscience of Repentance presumed to come before him with a Sacrifice; not procure atonement, but aggravate their breach.
According to one of these three senses are all passages in the Old Testament disparaging and rejecting Sacrifices literally to be understood: namely, when men preferred them before the greater things of the Law; valued them out of their degree, as an antecedent duty; or placed their efficacy in the naked Rite, as if ought accrued to God thereby; God would no longer own them for any ordinance of his: nor indeed in that disguise put upon them were they.
I will except only one Passage out of the number, which I suppose to have a singular meaning; to wit, that of David in the 51. Psalm, v. 16, 17. which the ancient translations thus express: Quoniam si voluisses sacrificium, dedissem utique; sed holocaustis non oblectaberis, (vel, holocaustum non acceptabis.) Sacrificium Deo spiritus contribulatus, &c.—If thou wouldst have had a Sacrifice, I would have offered it; but thou wilt accept no burnt-offering, &c.—For this seems to be meant of that special case of Adulterie and Murther which David here deploreth: for which Sins the Lord had provided no Sacrifice in his Law. Wherefore David in this his Penitential confession tells him, That if he had appointed any Sacrifice for expiation of this kind of sin, he would have given it him; but he had ordained none, save only a broken spirit and a contrite heart: which thou, O God, (saith he) wilt not despise, but accept that alone for a Sacrifice in this case, without which Sacrifice in no case is accepted.
Now out of this Discourse we are sufficiently furnished for the understanding of this Caution of Solomon in my Text, Be more ready to obey, than to offer the Sacrifice of fools; or, as the words in the Original import, Be more approaching God with a purpose and resolution of obedience to his Commandments, than with the Sacrifice of fools; that is, Have a care rather to approach the Divine Majesty with an offering of an obediential disposition, than with the bare and naked Rite. But the sense is still the same; namely, The House of God at Ierusalem was an House of sacrifice, which they, who came thither to worship, offered unto the Divine Majesty, to make way for their prayers and supplications unto him, or to find favour in his sight. Solomon therefore gives them here a caveat, not to place their Religion either only or chiefly in the external Rite, but in their readiness to hear and keep the Commandments of God; without which that Rite alone would avail them nothing, but be no better than the sacrifice of fools, who when they do evil, think they do well. For without this readiness to obey, this purpose of heart to live according to his Commandments, God accepts of no Sacrifice from those who approach him, nor will pardon their transgressions when they come before him. He therefore that makes no conscience of sinning against God, and yet thinks to be expiate by Sacrifice, is an ignorant fool, how wise and religious soever he may think himself to be, or appear unto men, by the multitude or greatness of his Sacrifices. The reason, Because the Lord requires Obedience antecedently and absolutely, but Sacrifice consequently only; and then too not primariò, or chiefly and for it self, but secondarily only, as a testimony of Coutrition and a ready desire and purpose in the offerer to continue in his favour by Obedience.
This is Solomon's the Preacher's meaning: Wherein behold, as in a glass, the condition of all external Service of God in general, as that which he accepteth no otherwise than secondarily; namely, as issuing from a Heart respectively affected with that devotion it importeth. For God, as he is a living God, so he requires a living worship: But as the Body without the Soul is but a carkass: so is all external and bodily worship wherein the pulse of the Heart's devotion beats not.
But if this be so, you will say, it were better to use no external worship at all of course, as we do the worship of the Body in the gestures of bowing, kneeling, standing, and the like, than to incur this danger of serving God with a dead and hypocritical service; because it is not like the Heart will be always duly affected when the outward worship shall be required. I answer; Where there is a true and real intent to honour God with outward and bodily worship, there the act is not Hypocrisie, though accompanied with many defects and imperfections. Here therefore that Rule of our Saviour touching the greater and lesser things of the Law must have place:Matt. 23. 23. & Luke 11. 42. foreign, These things (that is, the greater things of the Law) we ought to do, and not to leave the other (though the lesser) undone. For otherwise, if this reasoning were admitted, a man might upon the same ground absent himself from coming to Church upon the days and times appointed, or come thither but now and then; alledging the indisposition of his Heart to joyn with the Church in her publick worship at other times: or if he came thither, act a mute; and when others sing and praise God, be altogether silent, and not open his mouth, nor say Amen when others do. For all these are external services; and the service of the voice and gesture are in this respect all one, there is no difference. But who would not think this to be very absurd? We should rather upon every such occasion rouse and stir up our Affections with fit and seasonable meditations, that what the order and decency of … Church-assembly requires to be done of every member outwardly, we may likewise do devoutly and acceptably. These things we ought to do, and not leave the other undone.
But you will say, What if I cannot bring my Heart unto that religious fear and devotion which the outward worship I should perform requireth? I could say that some of the outward worship which a man performs in a Church-assembly, he does not as a singular man, but as a member of the Congregation. But howsoever, I answer; Let the worship of thy Body, in such a case, be at least a confession and acknowledgment before God of that love, fear and esteem of his Divine Majesty thou oughtest to have, but hast not. For though to come before God without that inward devotion requisite, be a sin; yet to confess and acknowledge, by what our outward gesture importeth, the duty we owe unto him, but are defective in, I hope is not; no more than the confession of any other sin. For our worship, in such a case, if we will so intend it, is an act of Repentance: and as the modern Greeks are wont to call their Adorations, foreign, Repentances; so may we in this case make ours to be: namely, as if we said, Lord, I ought to come before thee with that religious sear, humble reverence, and lifting up of Heart, which the gesture, the posture I here present, importeth; but, Lord, be merciful to me a sinner. If a mans Heart be so prophane and irreligious as not to acknowledge thus much, I yield that such a one might better spare his labour, and not come into the presence of God at all. Otherwise I conclude still with our Blessed Saviour's determination in the like case, Those greater things we ought to do, and not to leave the other undone.